First of all, put children first

A decade ago, the state was grappling with a "broken" social services system. The breaks became obvious after the death of a 2-year-old boy at the hands of his foster father.

The results of that death and the ensuing debate over how to fix the state's system resulted in what is known as the Dominic James Memorial Foster Care Reform Act of 2004.

We supported that law as we also called for a more systemic reform rather than piecemeal, knee-jerk legislation that often creates new problems as it seeks to solve others. Unfortunately, that is what happened with the Dominic James law.

Throughout the past decade, we have continued to report on and editorialize about the state's social services system, especially its Children's Division. Unfortunately, too many of those reports have covered other children's deaths, including some at the hands of parents.

Most recently, we reported on how the Dominic James law prevents the state from stepping in to remove children from possibly dangerous home situations. The News-Leader's Kathryn Wall, in her June 2 article "Unable to help," explained the conundrum by focusing on the deaths of Noah and Lily Adams at the hand of their mentally unstable mother, who also killed herself.

The deaths of 2-year-old Lily and 4-year-old Noah may not have been prevented if Dominic's law had not been passed, but they do point to a challenging balance between the safety of children and the rights of parents, as well as the value of family.

Dominic was taken from his alcoholic mother's custody after she suffered a mental breakdown. His father was homeless at the time, so he was not allowed to take the boy. Instead of being placed with Dominic's maternal grandparents, who would have gladly taken in their grandson, the toddler was placed with a foster family. In the following weeks, the boy's parents and others became concerned for his safety as he sported unexplained bruises and ended up in the hospital with seizurelike symptoms. Their concerns were ultimately ignored by caseworkers who put the boy back in his foster home where he was killed only days later.

"If a child dies in foster care, the pendulum swings and removing a child from the home is demonized. If a child dies from abuse at home, the pendulum swings back and every child is taken."

Those words were part of a News-Leader editorial in 2003, almost a year after Dominic's death. They apply today, almost four months after the deaths of Noah and Lily.

The legislative reaction to Dominic's death led to a law that made several changes in how the Children's Division operates - from more aggressive background checks on foster parents to opening records of court hearings. One of the reactions was that the pendulum swung sharply to the side of the parents, requiring that the level of evidence necessary to remove a child from their home be based on a "preponderance of evidence," a higher legal standard than the previous "probable cause" of abuse or neglect.

Many parents who had reported bullying and abuse by the state's social workers and investigators celebrated the change. Child advocates warned that respecting parental rights could put children's lives at risk.

Longtime state lawmaker Patrick Dougherty of St. Louis was in the Senate when Dominic's law passed. A former state family services worker, Dougherty rang the alarm about this change. He warned that the legislation could erode existing protections for children by making it harder for the state to intervene when it should, as did a task force in 2007.

Local legislators Norma Champion in the Senate and Mark Wright in the House desperately wanted to find a legislative answer to the senseless death of Dominic James. They worked hard to find a balance between the rights of parents, overworked caseworkers, the public and, most importantly, the children.

Between Dominic's death in 2002 and Noah and Lily's deaths in 2013, there have been other children who have died, and many more children and families who have been helped. But the Children's Division continues to struggle with high caseloads and low pay, poor morale and too much turnover, while the safety and security of our state's children take it on the chin.

As we called for a decade ago, we continue to plead with the state to reform its child-welfare system in a meaningful way, guided by principles that put the safety of children first while genuinely supporting families. That approach cannot come only in the form of legislation, which is often the result of political wrangling and compromise.

It takes real commitment on the part of the people of this state to demand that the pendulum stop its maddening swing so that we can focus on the goal of safer children and stronger families.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

First of all, put children first

A decade ago, the state was grappling with a 'broken' social services system. The breaks became obvious after the death of a 2-year-old boy at the hands of his foster father.